UNIVERSITI PUTRA MALAYSIA

ASAD MOHAMED ELMAGARHE

FK 2012 133

Oil PALM KERNEL SHELL CONCRETE MIX DESIGN AND BOND STRENGTH

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

Oil PALM KERNEL SHELL CONCRETE MIX DESIGN AND BOND STRENGTH

By

ASAD MOHAMED ELMAGARHE

Thesis Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, in Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Master of Science

May 2012

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

i

ABSTRACT

Abstract of thesis presented to the Senate of University Putra Malaysia in fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Master of Science

Oil PALM KERNEL SHELL CONCRETE MIX DESIGN AND BOND STRENGTH

By

ASAD MOHAMED ELMAGARHE

May 2012

Chair: Prof. Dato’ Ir. Mohd Saleh Jaafar, PhD

Faculty: Faculty of Engineering

Malaysia has been known for years to produce more than half of the world's

output of palm oil and produces approximately 3.13 million tonnes as wastes

in the form of oil palm shells (PKS) every year. A multitude of efforts have

been made in the direction of waste management, and one of these plans

are the use of PKS as a lightweight aggregate that can be used for

construction purposes. However, the properties of Lightweight OPS concrete

depend on the mix proportions, type of sand and the physical properties of

the materials used.

In order to ensure that PKS concrete can be used for structural purposes the

compressive strength should be at least 25 Mpa. The physical and

mechanical properties of PKS concrete showed that the densities and the

28-day compressive strengths of the concrete vary in range from 1750-2050

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

ii

kg/m3 and 12-24 N/mm2, respectively, which are not acceptable to be utilized

in structural application. Therefore, this project focuses on strength

performance of PKS concrete by finding optimized mix design as well as the

bond strength between concrete and steel bars. This work started by

choosing a suitable mix to be used for PKS concrete design. ACI 211.2-98

and ASTM C 330-00 have been chosen in order to start conducting trial

mixes and to prepare the materials used in optimized mix design. Metakaolin

has been used as a mineral admixture to ascertain its contribution in

improving the properties of PKS concrete. Tests on the mechanical

properties were conducted and the relationship between mechanical

properties was analysed. PKS concrete containing 10% metakaolin showed

a stronger bond and an increase of 28-day compressive strength by almost

25%. The splitting tensile strengths and modulus of rupture of PKS concrete

were found to be 7% and 20% of their compressive strengths. The modulus

of elasticity was found to be around 12KN/mm2 which is higher than values

found in the previous studies. Higher experimental bond strengths were

recorded for PKS concrete compared to predicted values and bond strengths

were found to be approximately 18% and 9% of compressive strength for

deformed and plain bars respectively.

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

iii

ABSTRAK

Abstrak tesis yang dikemukakan kepada Senat Universiti Putra Malaysia sebagai memenuhi keperluan untuk ijazah Master Sains

REKAAN DAN KEKUATAN IKATAN KONKRIT CAMPURAN TEMPURUNG KELAPA SAWIT

Oleh

ASAD MOHAMED ELMAGARHE

Mai 2012

Chair: Prof. Dato’ Ir. Mohd Saleh Jaafar, PhD

Faculty: Fakulti Kejuruteraan

Malaysia telah terkenal dalam penghasilan lebih daripada separuh

pengeluaran minyak kelapa sawit sedunia dan menghasilkan anggaran 3.14

juta tan bahan buangan dalam bentuk tempurung kelapa sawit (TKS) setiap

tahun. Pelbagai usaha telah dilakukan terhadap pengurusan bahan

buangan, dan salah satu daripadanya adalah penggunaan TKS sebagai

agregat ringan bagi tujuan pembinaan. Walaubagaimanapun, sifat konkrit

TKS ringan bergantung kepada kadar campuran, jenis pasir dan sifat fizikal

bahan yang digunakan.

Untuk menentukan bahawa konkrit TKS boleh digunakan untuk pembinaan,

kekuatan mampatannya sepatutnya sekurang-kurangya 25 Mpa. Sifat fizikal

dan mekanikal konkrit TKS menunjukkan bahawa ketumpatan dan kekuatan

mampatan 28-hari konkrit tersebut berubah dalam julat 1750-2050 kg/m3 dan

12-24 N/mm2 masing-masing. Ia masih belum boleh diterima untuk

penggunaan dalam pembinaan. Oleh itu, projek ini menumpu kepada

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

iv

prestasi kekuatan konkrit TKS dengan menemukan rekaan campuran yang

optima sekaligus dengan kekuatan ikatan di antara konkrit dan batang keluli.

Penyelidikan ini dimulakan dengan memilih campuran yang sesuai untuk

rekaan konkrit TKS. AC 211.2-98 dan ASTM C 330-00 dipilih untuk

menjalankan campuran ujian dan menyediakan bahan untuk digunakan

dalam rekaan campuran yang optima. Metakaolin telah digunakan sebagai

galian campuran untuk menentukan sumbangannya dalam memperbaikkan

sifat konkrit TKS. Ujian ke atas sifat mekanikal dan modulus elastik telah

dijalankan dan perkaitan di antara sifat mekanikal telah dikaji. Konkrit TKS

yang mengandungi 10% metakaolin menunjukkan ikatan yang lebih kuat

serta peningkatan kekuatan mampatan 28-hari hampir 25%. Kekuatan

tegangan pecah dan modulus pecah bagi TKS konkrit didapati 7% dan 20%

daripada kekuatan mampatannya. Modulus elastik didapati di sekitar 12

N/mm2 iaitu lebih tinggi daripada nilai yang ditemui dalam kajian

sebelumnya. Kekuatan ikatan teruji yang lebih tinggi telah direkod untuk

konkrit TKS berbanding dengan nilai ramalan dan kekuatan ikatan didapati

lebih kurang 18% dan 9% daripada kekuatan mampatan untuk batang

terubah dan juga batang biasa.

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor and committee

chair, Prof. Mohd Saleh Jaafar, for his support during my two years of

graduate study. His guidance and knowledge have always helped and

enlightened me. I would like also to thank Dr. Jenaan Alfeel for her advice,

encouragement and patience throughout the research. I also thank Dr. Farah

Abdul Aziz for her interest in my study and serving as my committee

member.

This study is supported by the Department of Civil Engineering of UPM

University. I thank Dr. Voo Yen Lei for his technical support for supplying the

superplasticizers that used in this research. Palm kernel shells used in this

study are generously donated by Soon Seng Palm Oil Mill Sdn. Bhd, and and

their generosity are gratefully acknowledged.

I also appreciate and thank Mohamed Alhabshi, Ali Hasoon and Omar Awad

for their involvement and assistance in the experimental portion of this study,

and without their support and hard work, it is impossible for me to accomplish

all the making of concrete, testing program and formatting the thesis.

I also want to thank Mohd Fairus Ismail, Aminuddin b.Amdam and Mohd.

Razali b. Abdul Rahman from Materials and Engineering Laboratory for their

generous support of my research project.

I thank all my friends who have given me emotional support. Special thanks

are given to my parents and my brothers and sisters for their love.

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

vi

APPROVAL

I certify that a Thesis Examination Committee has met on (to be announced

by GSO) to conduct the final examination of Asad Mohamed Elmagarhe on

his thesis entitled “Optimizing the Mix Design of Oil Palm Shell Concrete”

in accordance with the Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 and the

Constitution of the University Putra Malaysia [P.U. (A) 106] 15 March 1998.

The committee recommends that the student be awarded the Thesis of Science.

Members of the Thesis Examination committee were as follow:

Name of Chairperson, PhD Title (e.g. Professor/ Associate professor/ Ir) Name of Faculty University putra Malaysia (Chairman)

Name of Examiner 1, PhD Title (e.g. Professor/ Associate professor/ Ir) Name of Faculty University putra Malaysia (Internal Examiner)

Name of Examiner 2, PhD Title (e.g. Professor/ Associate professor/ Ir) Name of Faculty University putra Malaysia (Internal Examiner) Name of External Examiner 2, PhD Title (e.g. Professor/ Associate professor/ Ir) Name of Department and/ or Faculty Name of Organization (University/ Institute Country (Internal Examiner) ZULKARNAIN ZAINAL, PhD Professor and Deputy Dean School of Graduate Studies Universiti Putra Malaysia Date:

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

vii

This thesis was submitted to the Senate of University Putra Malaysia and

has been accepted as fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Master. The members of the Supervisory Committee were as follows:

Mohd Saleh b Jaafar Professor Faculty of Engineering Universiti Putra Malaysia (Chairman)

Farah Nora Aznieta binti Abdul Aziz Senior Lecturer Faculty of Engineering Universiti Putra Malaysia (Internal Member) Jamaloddin Noorzaei Professor Faculty of Engineering Universiti Putra Malaysia (Internal Member) Janan Rasheed Alfeel

Associate Professor Mosul University (External Member)

BUJANG BIN KIM HUAT, PHD Professor and Dean School of Graduate Studies Universiti Putra Malaysia Date:

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

viii

DECLARATION

I declare that the thesis is my original work except for quotations and

citations which have been duly acknowledged. I also declare that it has not

been previously, and is not concurrently, submitted for any other degree at

University Putra Malaysia or at any other institution.

ASAD MOHAMED ELMAGARHE

Date: 22 May 2012

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ABSTRACT i ABSTRAK iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT v

APPROVAL vi DECLARATION viii LIST OF TABLES xiii LIST OF FIGURES xv

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xvii DEDICATION xviii

CHAPTER

1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 General 1

1.2 Problem statement 3 1.2.1 Mix design of Palm Kernel Shell concrete 3

1.2.2 Using the metakaolin as mineral admixtures in PKS concrete 4

1.2.3 Utilization of Palm Kernel shell in structural applications 7

1.3 Research objectives 8

1.4 Scope of this research 8

2 LITERATURE REVIEW 10

2.1 Lightweight Concrete 10 2.1.1 Introduction 10 2.1.2 Types of lightweight concrete 11

2.2 Lightweight aggregates (LWAs) 12 2.2.1 Manufactured aggregates 12

2.2.2 Natural aggregates 14

2.3 Structural lightweight aggregate concrete (SLWC) 18 2.3.1 Properties of Structural Lightweight Aggregate

Concrete 19

2.3.1.1 Fresh concrete 19 2.3.1.2 Density 19

2.3.1.3 Compressive strength 20 2.3.1.4 Tensile strength 21

2.3.1.5 Modulus of elasticity 23 2.3.1.6 Creep 24

2.3.1.7 Shrinkage 25 2.4 Palm Kernel shell as lightweight aggregates 25

2.4.1 Physical and mechanical properties 25

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

x

2.4.2 Improving the quality of PKS concrete 28

2.5 Palm kernel shell concrete (PKSC) 28 2.5.1 Preceding works performed on palm kernel

shell concrete 28 2.5.2 Properties of palm kernel shell concrete 31

2.5.2.1 Density and workability 31

2.5.2.2 ompressive strength 34 2.5.2.3 Tensile strengths 36

2.5.2.4 Modulus of elasticity (MOE) 37 2.6 Mix Design of Palm kernel shell concrete 38

2.7 Structural behaviour 39 2.7.1 Bond strength 39

2.7.2 Flexural behaviour of reinforced concrete 41

2.8 Metakaolin as a cement replacement 43 2.8.1 Introduction 43

2.8.2 Pozzolanic reaction 44 2.8.3 Properties of Fresh Metakaolin Concrete 46

2.8.4 Effect of metakaolin as cement replacement on compressive strength of concrete 47

2.9 Concluding Remarks 48

3 METHODOLOGY 50

3.1 Introduction 50

3.2 Materials used in the investigation 52 3.2.1 Cement 52

3.2.2 High Reactivity Metakaolin (HRM) 52

3.2.3 Water 53

3.2.4 Superplasticizer (SP) 53 3.2.5 Aggregates and tests 54

3.2.6 Fine aggregate 54

3.2.7 Coarse aggregate 55 3.2.8 Testing of aggregates 57

3.2.8.1 Sieve Analysis 57

3.2.8.2 Specific gravity and absorption test (Coarse aggregate) 57

3.2.8.3 Specific gravity (SG) and absorption test (fine aggregate) 58

3.2.8.4 Bulk Density (“Unit Weight”) and Voids in aggregate 59

3.2.8.5 Total Evaporable moisture content in the aggregates 60

3.2.9 Reinforcing bars 61

3.3 Mixture proportioning 61 3.3.1 The weight method for selecting proportions for

structural lightweight concrete according to (ACI 211.2) 61

3.3.2 Trial batch adjustments 62

3.4 Preparation and Testing of specimens 63 3.4.1 Specimen preparation 63

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

xi

3.4.2 Mixing, casting and curing procedures of the Materials 63

3.4.3 Testing of fresh concrete 65

3.4.3.1 Slump Test 65 3.4.3.2 Compacting factor Test 65

3.4.4 Specimens for mechanical properties of concrete 68 3.4.4.1 Compressive specimen 68

3.4.4.2 Modulus of elasticity specimen 68 3.4.4.3 Flexural Strength specimen 68

3.4.4.4 Splitting Tensile Strength specimen 70

3.4.4.5 Data analysis using ANOVA 70 3.5 Experiment on structural behaviour 71

3.5.1 Introduction 71 3.5.2 Pullout test 71

3.5.3 Instrumentation 73

3.5.3.1 Linear variable differential transformer (LVDT) 73

3.5.3.2 Data logger 73 3.5.3.3 Instron Universal Testing Machine

(UTM) 73

4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 74

4.1 Introduction 74 4.2 Properties of aggregates used 75

4.2.1 Sieve analysis of coarse aggregate 75 4.2.2 Sieve analysis of fine aggregate 78

4.2.2.1 Fineness Modulus (FM) 79 4.2.3 Specific Gravity and absorption test for PKS 80 4.2.4 Bulk Density and Voids ratio PKS aggregates 82

4.2.5 Specific Gravity and absorption test for Mining Sand 83

4.3 Properties of concrete 84 4.3.1 Effect of variation in cement content & mineral

admixture (Metakaolin) on workability 84 4.3.2 Effect of variation in cement content & mineral

admixture (Metakolin) on density 88 4.3.3 Effect of variation in cement content & mineral

admixture (Metakolin) on compressive strength 91 4.3.3.1 Introduction 91

4.3.3.2 Development of compressive strength with age 92

4.3.3.3 Strength to density ratio 96 4.3.3.4 Mode of failure in compression

test 97 4.4 Mechanical properties of selected PKS Mix 99

4.4.1 Modulus of elasticity 99

4.4.2 Splitting Tensile Strength 101

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

xii

4.4.3 Interpretation of ANOVA analysis of splitting tensile strength 102

4.4.4 Modulus of rupture 103

4.4.5 Interpretation of ANOVA analysis of flexural strength 105

4.4.6 Mode of failure in tensile strength 106

4.5 Bond behaviour 108

4.5.1 Comparison between NWC grade 30 and PKSC-C4 108

4.5.2 Comparison between two PKSC mixes with deferent cement content 109

4.5.3 The effect of plain and deformed bar size on the bond stress and slip of PKSC-C4 110

4.5.4 Modes of failure in bond for plain and deformed bar 113

4.5.5 A comparison between theoretical and experimental bond strength of PKSC-C4 115

4.6 Optimization performed in this research 117 4.6.1 Enhancement of compressive strength

compared to published data 117 4.6.2 Enhancement of modulus of elasticity

compared to published data 117 4.6.3 Enhancement of tensile strength compared to

the published data 118

4.7 Cost analysis 122

5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 123

5.1 Introduction 123 5.2 Physical and mechanical properties of concrete 124

5.2.1 Workability and density 124

5.2.2 Compressive strength 124 5.2.3 Modulus of elasticity 125

5.2.4 Tensile strength 126

5.3 Structural behaviours 126 5.3.1 Bond behaviors 126

5.4 Recommendations 128

REFERENCES 129

APPENDICES 137 BIODATA OF STUDENT 172

LIST OF PUBLICATIONS 173

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

xiii

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

2.1: Groups of Lightweight Concrete (Shetty, 2005) [7] 11

‎2.2: Properties of various aggregate types (Sear, 2001) [27] 13

2.3: Typical properties of lightweight aggregates (Clarke John, 1993) [28] 14

2.4: Properties of some types of sintered diatomite concrete (Short and Kinniburghm, 1978) [6]. 16

2.5: The physical and mechanical properties of palm kernel shell 27

2.6: The properties of palm kernel shell concrete 33

2.7: Pozolanic reactivity, Chapelle Test, (Kostuch et al., 2000) [63] 45

‎3.1: Chemical compositions of cement and high reactivity metakaolin 52

3.2: Requirements of metakaolin according to (ASTM C 618) 53

3.3: Testing of fine and coarse aggregates 57

‎3.4: Material characteristics used for mix design 62

3.5: Mix design for PKS concrete based on modified ACI mix proportions (mix proportion by weight) and water cement ratio of (0.35) 63

4.1: Grading Requirement for Coarse Aggregate 76

4.2: Limits of fine aggregates gradation 78

‎4.3: Specific Gravity Test results for Palm Kernel shell (ASTM C127) 81

4.4: The bulk density and void ratio of PKS aggregate 82

‎4.5: Specific Gravity Test results for mining sand (ASTM C128) 83

4.6: Fresh properties of PKS concrete mixes with variation of cement content and mineral admixture (Metakaolin) 84

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

xiv

4.7: Relationship between demoulded density & air-dry density with variation of cement content 88

4.8: Results of the mix designed according to ACI 211.1-98 91

‎4.9: Comparison of compressive strength of PKS & HS concrete with variation of cement and metakaolin content for W/C ratio 0.35 94

‎4.10: Compressive strength to De-moulded density & Air-dry ratio 96

4.11: Splitting tensile strength for PKSC-C4 and HSC-C1 101

4.12: One-way ANOVA of force and splitting tensile strength 102

4.13: One-way ANOVA of weight and splitting tensile strength 102

4.14: Modulus of rupture of PKSC-C4 and HSC-C1 103

4.15: One-way ANOVA of force and flextural tensile strength 105

4.16: One-way ANOVA of weight and flextural tensile strength 105

4.17: Bond strength of PKSC-C4 with plain and deformed bars 115

4.18: Data from published work and present research 120

‎4.19: The cost of production 1 m3 of PKSC-C4 122

4.20: The cost of production 1 m3 of NWC concrete (Alengaram et al. [12] ) mix 122

4.2: Palm Kernel Shell Sieve analysis 142

4.3: Granite Sieve analysis 142

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

xv

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1.1: PKS Production in Peninsula Malaysia (By State) in 2004, (Dit, 2007) [4] 2

‎2.1: Palm Kernel Aggregates 17

2.2: Cube strength for a various types of lightweight aggregate. (Struct, 1987) [39] 21

3.1: The particle size distribution of sand and PKS (Palm Kernel Shell) 54

‎3.2: Treatment procedures for palm kernel shell aggregates 56

3.3: Slump Test 67

3.4: Compacting Factor Test 67

‎3.5: Modulus of Elasticity test 69

3.6: Flexural tensile strength test 69

3.7: Splitting tensile strength 70

‎3.8: Pullout Test 72

4.1: Particle Size Distribution of Palm Kernel Shell Aggregates 77

4.2: Particle Size Distribution of Granite Aggregates 77

‎4.3: Particle Size Distribution of Fine Aggregate 79

4.4: Slump behaviour for mix (A) with variation of cementitious materials and superplasticizer content 87

‎4.5: Slump behaviour for mix (B) with variation of cementitious materials content 87

‎4.6: Slump behaviour for mix (C) with variation of cementitious materials content 87

4.7: Relationship between de-moulded density and air-dry density in term of cement content & 0% metakaolin 89

‎4.8: Relationship between de-moulded density and air-dry density in terms of cement content & 5% metakaolin 90

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

xvi

‎4.9: Relationship between de-moulded density and air-dry density in terms of cement content & 10% metakaolin 90

4.10: Development and comparison in compressive strength for Mix (A1), (A2), (A3) and (A4) 94

4.11: Development and comparison in compressive strength for Mix (B1), (B2), (B3) and (B4) 95

‎4.12: Development and comparison in compressive strength for Mix (C1), (C2), (C3) and (C4) 95

‎4.13: Mode of surface failure (A) & Bond failure between PKS and cement matrix 98

4.14: Mode of surface failure (A) & Bond failure between PKS and cement matrix 98

‎4.15: Mode of failure for high strength concrete 98

‎4.16: Stress and strain relationship for PKSC and HSC 100

4.17: Mode of surface failure in splitting tensile strength for PKSC-C4 107

‎4.18: Mode of surface failure in flexural tensile strength for PKSC-C4 107

4.19: Bond stress and slip for PKSC-C4 and NWC-grade 30 108

4.20: Bond stress and slip for PKSC-C4 and PKSC (Alengaram et.al) [8] 109

4.21: Effect of the size of the plain bar on the bond stress and slip for PKSC-C4 112

‎4.22: Effect of the size of the deformed bar on the bond stress and slip for PKSC-C4 112

4.23: Mode of failure in bond between PKSC-C4 and plain bar 114

4.24: Mode of failure in bond between PKSC-C4 and deformed bar size 10mm 114

4.25: Mode of failure in bond between PKSC-C4 and deformed bar size 16mm 114

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

xvii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

FA

:Fly Ash

HRM :High Reactivity Metakaolin HSC :High Strength Concrete LVDT :Linear Variable Differential Transformer LWA :Lightweight Aggregate LWAC :Lightweight aggregate Concrete MK :Metakaolin MOR :Modulus of Rupture NA :Not available NWC :Normal Weight Concrete OPC :Ordinary Portland Cement OPS :Oil Palm Shell PFA :Pulverized fuel ash PKS :Palm Kernel Shell PKSC :Palm Kernel Shell Concrete SEM :Scanning Electron Microscopy SF :Silica Fume SLWAC :Structural Lightweight Aggregate Concrete SP :Superplasticizer SSD :Saturated Surface Dry

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

xviii

DEDICATION

This thesis is dedicated to my family who have always given me emotional support.

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

1

CHAPTER 1

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 General

The use of agro-waste materials in construction is becoming more popular

due to current economic and environmental concerns. Large amount of agro-

waste materials or green materials such as sawdust ash, vegetables fibers,

palm oil kernel shells, rice husk ash, etc. are being utilized as raw materials

for blended components in concrete. However, broad utilization of green

materials is still limited due to excessive treatments that may be required

before they can be effectively used with cement [1].

Malaysia, Nigeria, Thailand and Indonesia are the countries that produce the

largest quantities of palm oil. Consequently, they are also processing a large

amount of industrial waste, which is dumped in factory yards. Over the last

30 years, awareness has grown particularly in Malaysia and Nigeria

regarding disposal management strategies. One of the successful strategies

is the potential of utilizing agricultural and industrial waste as construction

materials. Thus, the use of waste materials, particularly in the manufacture of

Lightweight Aggregates (LWA) is considered productive and vital. The PKS

production in Malaysia is shown in Figure 1.1.

For this research, palm kernel shell (PKS), sometimes referred to as oil palm

shells (OPS) is the industrial waste used as a LWA. Okpala [2] stated that

the African people had used PKS in the past to build their mud houses and

even nowadays the reaming is still in good condition. Teo et al [3] reported

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

2

that in Malaysia, PKS was implemented in the construction of low-cost

houses by using PKS hollow blocks for the walls and PKS concrete for the

footings. He also expressed that lintels and beams showed acceptable

performance with no serious structural problems during sustained load.

Figure 1.1: PKS Production in Peninsula Malaysia (By State) in 2004, (Dit, 2007) [4]

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

3

1.2 Problem statement

1.2.1 Mix design of Palm Kernel Shell concrete

There were several preliminary investigations done by Mannan and

Ganapathy [5] to identify an appropriate mix design for palm kernel shell

concrete. Three different methods were followed, ACI mix design method for

normal weight concrete and the mix design method mentioned in references

[5, 6]. None of these procedures as presented in their findings achieved the

targeted compressive strength of 25 N/mm2. The maximum compressive

strength that was gained was around 14 N/mm2, which is also below the

minimum strength of structural lightweight concrete; 17 N/mm2 [8]. Finally,

Mannan and Ganapathy [5] concluded that PKS mix design should be

subjected to a trial-and error method in order to obtain a proper mix

proportion.

Another mix design approach was presented by Alengaram et al [9] and

Shafigh et al [10] as their mixes displayed high compressive strengths of 37

and 45 N/mm2, respectively. Nevertheless, both mixes contain high cement

content, (535 kg/m3) for Alengaram and (550 kg/m3) for Shafigh. Thus, using

high cement content with aggregates classified as waste materials will

achieve a low-cost concrete. Hence, for this study the optimized mix design

focuses on lowering the cement content, which will has tremendous effect on

the cost besides achieving an acceptable compressive strength for LWAC.

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

4

1.2.2 Using the metakaolin as mineral admixtures in PKS concrete

Generally, according to previous researches, the failure of PKSC is

controlled by two things, i.e., the failure of the shell itself or by the bond

between PKS and cement matrix. This problem has been addressed by a

couple of researchers by adding the mineral admixtures such as fly ash and

silica fume to the PKSC. Basri et al [11] proved that using fly ash (FA) with

class F as a mineral admixture in PKSC did not achieve the desired outcome

to optimize compressive strength. Moreover, they indicated a reduction in

compressive strength of almost 25% by using 15% fly ash as a cement

replacement.

Alengaram et al [12] used silica fume (SF) as a cement additive. They found

that the 28-day compressive strength was around 37 N/mm2. This finding

gave evidence that the weaker zone, i.e. the zone between the aggregate

and cement’s interface was strengthened by utilizing SF. Hence, eventually,

the bond strength increased to produce a higher compressive strength.

PKS has a flaky and irregular shape so it has an explicit effect on workability.

According to Alengaram et al [9]， SF should be used between 8% and 10%

in order to cover the entire shell’s surface. Consequently, using 10% SF as a

cement additive combined with the irregularity shape effect of the shells will

cause a high demand for water to maintain workability. Eventually, a special

or high-water reducer (superplasticizer) will also be needed to make the

concrete more workable.

In this research, 5 and 10% of metakaolin (MK) has been used as a cement

replacement in order to optimize the mix design of PKSC. MK was chosen in

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

5

this study rather than other types of supplementary materials for four

important reasons:

The reactivity of metakaolin was very high when compared with other

types of pozzolanic materials. Metakaolin comprises the highest percentage

of alumino-silicates between the pozzolanic materials, enabling it to

maximise the durability of concrete binder [13]. Metakaolin extremely reacts

with lime more athan flyash that its reaction with lime in concrete may take

up to two month [14], while metakaolin, the reaction may occur within two

weeks [15].

Metakaolin has a low specific gravity in the range of 2.10 to 2.60

compared to other types of supplementary materials such as fly ash, 2.6 to

3.0, and blast furnace slag, 2.80 to 2.95. Therefore, using metakaolin to

replace the cement that has a specific gravity in the range of 3.0 to 3.10 will

has tangible effect upon density. This fact was approved from Al-Sibahy and

Edward [16] who used the metakaloin to replace cement for lightweight

concrete contained a recycled glass. According to their findings they noticed

that by increasing the percentage of metakaloin from 0, 5 and 10% as

cement replacement, the density had a reduction around 1680, 1670 and

1620kg/m3, respectively. Thus, using metakaolin instead of other types of

supplementary materials not only will enhance the mechanical property of

PKS concrete but also will provide more acceptable density for structural

lightweight concrete.

Another advantage is that metakaolin is not classified as a by-product,

unlike other pozzolanic materials which their engineering properties cannot

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

6

be control [17]. Therefore, implementing metakaolin will promise some

benefits comparable to other supplementary materials. In this study,

evaluation the performance of metakaolin-PKS concrete will be compared to

other lightweight PKS concrete contains incorporation different

supplementary materials from previous published work.

Dubey and Banthia [18] reported that the slump values for concrete

mixes comprised of 10% SF were found to be equal to half the values of

mixes that contain the same proportion of MK. That means MK concrete

requires less quantity of high water reducer compared to SF.

There were no previous research studies investigating the effect of

MK on the mechanical properties of PKSC.

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

7

1.2.3 Utilization of Palm Kernel shell in structural applications

In 1984, Abdullah [19] carried out a first study concerning usage of PKS as a

lightweight aggregate to produce LWC. Abdullah proved from his findings

that the resulting concrete has an air-dry density in the range of 1840-2050

kg/m3 and 28-day compressive strength between 5 and 20 N/mm2. However,

most codes and standards require a specified minimum strength for

structural lightweight aggregate concrete, for example, ASTM C330 [20]

specified that the minimum strength for structural lightweight concrete is 17

N/mm2. BS 5400 [21] required minimum allowable cube strength of 25

N/mm2 for LWAC to be used in structural application such as reinforced

concrete bridges. In this research the target strength of 30 N/mm2 was

allocated to ensure PKSC to be use in structural application. Shafigh et al

[22] and Ng et al [23] did an investigation of in the structural integrity of palm

kernel shell reinforced concrete, they reported that although PKSC has good

mechanical properties such as perfect insulation, it still needs additional

investigation for their structural behavior as the PKS concrete slap for

instance failed to fulfilled the minimum strength requirement at the time of

lifting, transporting and the time of service. Eventually, they concluded that a

further tests regarding of structural behavior are required.

Another study was done by Alengaram et al. [12], who studied the effect of

silica fume in the bond strength of PKSC beam, they observed that PKSC

beam exhibited under ductile load several cracks with a very small crack

width which gave an indication of strong bond between PKSC and reinforced

bars. Eventually, they concluded that using silica fume as cement

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

8

replacement enhanced the bond strength of PKS concrete. There are various

factors that affect the bond strength of palm kernel shell concrete (PKSC)

such as mix proportions, density and curing conditions. Thus, in this study

metakaolin has been used as cement replacement not only to enhance the

bond strength of PKSC but also by limiting the air-density to be in the margin

of structural lightweight concrete. Herewith, the bond strength was chosen as

the margin to indicate the development in the structural behavior for

proposed mix designation.

1.3 Research objectives

The objectives of this study can be summarized as given below:

i) To determine the optimum mix design of PKSC by limiting the cement

content between 400 to 480 kg/m3 and To study the effect of metakaolin

as a mineral admixture in PKS concrete.

ii) To identify the enhancement in the bond strength between PKSC and

steel bar.

1.4 Scope of this research

The development of the mix design of PKSC was done by limiting the

cement content to be in the range of 400 to 480 kg/m3. Also, this research

work addressed the potentiality of using high reactive metakaolin (HRM) as a

supplementary cementitious material in PKS concrete mixes. Four different

mixes were used and every mix proportion was incorporated with 0, 5 and

10% of high-reactivity metakaolin (HRM) in order to optimize the

compressive strength and mechanical properties of PKSC. The PKS

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

9

aggregate for the four mixes was fully replaced with granite aggregate and

nominated as the control mix.

The fresh and hardened concrete properties of PKSC were chosen to be the

base of this study, by analyzing and comparing the behaviors for each

concrete mix. Slump and compacting factor test was chosen to evaluate the

workability of concrete mixes. All concrete samples were cured under water

tank regimes for almost one month. The mixes that incorporated 10%

metakaolin showed the highest compressive strength of more than 30

N/mm2. One mix that is considered as an optimized mix was selected

according to its low cement content and high compressive strength. The

mechanical properties of the selected mix was investigated and compared

with the same concrete mix but fully replaced with granite aggregate. The

bond stress of the selected mix of PKSC was compared to a similar grade of

NWC. Twenty-one cylindrical concrete reinforced with plain and deformed

bars of different sizes was tested and compared concerning its bond strength

behaviour.

However, some limitations were set which would not cover for this study:

Studies related to durability and thermal conductivities are not included.

No studies on long term properties such as shrinkage and creep.

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

129

REFERENCES

[1] M. A. Mannan, J. Alexander, C. Ganapathy, and D. C. L. Teo, “Quality improvement of oil palm shell (OPS) as coarse aggregate in lightweight concrete,” Building and environment, vol. 41, no. 9, pp. 1239–1242, 2006.

[2] D. C. Okpala, “Palm kernel shell as a lightweight aggregate in concrete,” Building and Environment, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 291–296, 1990.

[3] D. C. L. Teo, M. A. Mannan, V. J. Kurian, and C. Ganapathy, “Lightweight concrete made from oil palm shell (OPS): Structural bond and durability properties,” Building and environment, vol. 42, no. 7, pp. 2614–2621, 2007.

[4] M. Dit, “Palm kernel shell (PKS) is more than biomass for alternative fuel after 2005,” in Proceedings of Chemistry and Technology Conference, Kuala lumpur, Malayia, 2007.

[5] M. A. Mannan and C. Ganapathy, “Mix design for oil palm shell concrete,” Cement and concrete research, vol. 31, no. 9, pp. 1323–1325, 2001.

[6] A. Short and W. Kinniburgh, Lightweight concrete, 3rd ed. London, UK: Applied Science Publishers, 1978.

[7] M. S. Shetty, Concrete Technology Theory and Practice, 1st ed. New Delhi, India: Chand (S.) & Co Ltd, 2005.

[8] ACI Committee 213, Guide for Structural Lightweight Aggregate Concrete. US: American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 1987.

[9] U. J. Alengaram, H. Mahmud, and M. Z. Jumaat, “Comparison of mechanical and bond properties of oil palm kernel shell concrete with normal weight concrete,” International Journal of the Physical Sciences, vol. 5, no. 8, pp. 1231–1239, 2010.

[10] P. Shafigh, M. Z. Jumaat, and H. Mahmud, “Oil palm shell as a lightweight aggregate for production high strength lightweight concrete,” Construction and Building Materials, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 1884–1853, 2010.

[11] H. B. Basri, M. A. Mannan, and M. F. . Zain, “Concrete using waste oil palm shells as aggregate,” Cement and concrete research, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 619–622, 1999.

[12] U. J. Alengaram, M. Z. Jumaat, and H. Mahmud, “Ductility behaviour of reinforced palm kernel shell concrete beams,” European Journal of Scientific Research, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 406–420, 2008.

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

130

[13] R. Siddique, Waste materials and by-products in concrete. London, UK: Springer Verlag, 2007.

[14] J. M. Justice, L. H. Kennison, B. J. Mohr, S. L. Beckwith, L. E. McCormick, B. Wiggins, Z. Z. Zhang, and K. E. Kurtis, “Comparison of two metakaolins and a silica fume used as supplementary cementitious materials,” in SP-228, ACI, Farmington Hills, Mich, Washington D.C, USA, 2005, pp. 213–236.

[15] E. Güneyisi, M. Gesoğlu, and K. Mermerdaş, “Improving strength, drying shrinkage, and pore structure of concrete using metakaolin,” Materials and Structures, vol. 41, no. 5, pp. 937–949, 2008.

[16] A. Al-Sibahy and R. Edwards, “Mechanical and thermal properties of novel lightweight concrete mixtures containing recycled glass and metakaolin,” Construction and Building Materials, vol. 31, pp. 157–167, 2012.

[17] E. Badogiannis and S. Tsivilis, “Exploitation of poor Greek kaolins: durability of metakaolin concrete,” Cement and Concrete Composites, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 128–133, 2009.

[18] A. Dubey and N. Banthia, “Influence of high-reactivity metakaolin and silica fume on the flexural toughness of high-performance steel fiber reinforced concrete,” ACI Materials Journal, vol. 95, no. 3, pp. 284–292, 1998.

[19] A. A. A. Abdullah, “Basic strength properties of lightweight concrete using agricultural wastes as aggregates,” in Proceedings of International Conference on Low-cost Housing for Developing Countries, Roorkee, India, 1984.

[20] ASTM C330., Standard Specification for Lightweight Aggregates for Structural Concrete. Annual Book of ASTM Standards.

[21] BS 5400, Steel, Concrete and Composite Bridges, Part 10, Code of Practice for Fatigue. London,UK: British Standards Institution, 1990.

[22] P. Shafigh, M. Hassanpour, S. V. Razavi, and M. Kobraei, “An investigation of the flexural behaviour of reinforced lightweight concrete beams,” International Journal of the Physical Sciences, vol. 6, no. 10, pp. 2414–2421, 2011.

[23] C. H. Ng, Z. Ideris, S. P. Narayanan, M. A. Mannan, and V. J. Kurian, “Flexural Behavior of Oil Palm Shell (Ops) Hybrid Precast Concrete Flooring Slab,” presented at the World Engineering Congress, Penang, Malaysia, 2007.

[24] A. M. Neville, Properties of Concrete. Essex, UK: Longman Group Limited, 1995.

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

131

[25] N. Krishna Raju, Design of concrete mixes. New Delhi, India: CBS Publishers, 2002.

[26] S. Chandra and L. Berntsson, Lightweight aggregate concrete: science, technology, and applications. New Delhi, India: William Andrew, 2002.

[27] L. K. A. Sear, Properties and use of coal fly ash: a valuable industrial by-product. London, UK: Thomas Telford, 2001.

[28] J. L. Clarke, Structural lightweight aggregate concrete. Glasgow,UK: Blackie Academic & Professional, 1993.

[29] G. G. Artioli, Scientific methods and cultural heritage: an introduction to the application of materials science to archaeometry and conservation science, 1st ed. US: Oxford University Press, 2010.

[30] L. J. Csetenyi, Innovations and developments in concrete materials and construction: proceedings of the International Conference held at the University of Dundee, Scotland, UK on 9-11 September 2002, vol. 1. Thomas Telford, 2002.

[31] P. Klieger and J. F. Lamond, Significance of tests and properties of concrete and concrete-making materials, 3rd ed. US: ASTM International, 1994.

[32] S. Chandra, Waste materials used in concrete manufacturing, 1st ed. New Delhi, India: William Andrew, 1997.

[33] M. A. Mannan and C. Ganapathy, “Engineering properties of concrete with oil palm shell as coarse aggregate,” Construction and Building Materials, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 29–34, 2002.

[34] F. O. Okafor, “Palm kernel shell as a lightweight aggregate for concrete,” Cement and Concrete Research, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 901–910, 1988.

[35] P. N. Ndoke, “Performance of Palm Kernel Shells as a Partial replacement for Coarse Aggregate in Asphalt Concrete,” Leonardo Electronic Journal of Practices and Technologies, vol. 5, no. 9, pp. 145–

152, 2006.

[36] B. EN, “206-1 (2000). Concrete–Part 1: Specification, Performance, Production and Conformity,” British Standards Institution, UK, 2001.

[37] F. béton, Structural concrete: textbook on behaviour, design and performance, 2nd ed., vol. 3. France: FIB-Féd. Int. du Béton, 1999.

[38] J. B. Newman, Advanced concrete technology, 1st ed. Elsevier/Butterworth-Heinemann, 2003.

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

132

[39] I. Struct, Guide to the Structural Use of Lightweight Aggregate. London: Institution of Structural Engineers, 1987.

[40] T. W. Bremner and T. A. Holm, “Elastic compatibility and the behavior of concrete,” ACI Journal Proceedings, vol. 83, no. 2, pp. 244–250, 1986.

[41] ACI.318, Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-05) and Commentary, 2nd ed. American Concrete Institute, 2005.

[42] E. G. Nawy, Fundamentals of high-performance concrete, 2nd ed. Wiley, 2001.

[43] S. Khan and M. Williams, Post-tensioned concrete floors. Laxton’s, 1995.

[44] U. J. Alengaram, M. Z. Jumaat, and H. Mahmud, “Influence of sand content and silica fume on mechanical properties of palm kernel shell concrete,” in International conference on construction and building technology ICCBT, Malaysia, 2008, pp. 251–262.

[45] BS 3797, Specification For lightweight Aggregate For Masonry Units And Structural Concrete. London,UK: British Standards Institution, 1990.

[46] M. Z. Jumaat, U. J. Alengaram, and H. Mahmud, “Shear strength of oil palm shell foamed concrete beams,” Materials & Design, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 2227–2236, 2009.

[47] M. A. Mannan and C. Ganapathy, “Concrete from an agricultural waste-oil palm shell (OPS),” Building and environment, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 441–

448, 2004.

[48] E. A. Olanipekun, K. O. Olusola, and O. Ata, “A comparative study of concrete properties using coconut shell and palm kernel shell as coarse aggregates,” Building and environment, vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 297–301, 2006.

[49] U. J. Alengaram, H. Mahmud, and M. Z. Jumaat, “Enhancement and prediction of modulus of elasticity of palm kernel shell concrete,” Materials & Design, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 2143–2148, 2010.

[50] F. A. Olutoge, “Investigations On Sawdust And Palm Kernel Shells As Aggregate Replacement,” ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 7–13, 2010.

[51] M. A. Mannan and C. Ganapathy, “Long-term strengths of concrete with oil palm shell as coarse aggregate,” Cement and concrete research, vol. 31, no. 9, pp. 1319–1321, 2001.

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

133

[52] A. H. Nilson, D. Darwin, C. W. Dolan, and C. Zhan, Design of concrete structures, 13th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1997.

[53] P. Shafigh, H. Mahmud, and M. Z. Jumaat, “Effect of steel fiber on the mechanical properties of oil palm shell lightweight concrete,” Materials & Design, vol. 32, no. 7, pp. 3926–3932, 2011.

[54] J. M. Khatib and P. S. Mangat, “Absorption characteristics of concrete as a function of location relative to casting position,” Cement and concrete research, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 999–1010, 1995.

[55] E. Ahmed and H. R. Sobuz, “Flexural and time-dependent performance of palm shell aggregate concrete beam,” KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 859–865, 2011.

[56] D. J. Cook, “Calcined clay, shale and other soils,” Cement replacement materials, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 40–72, 1985.

[57] R. A. Aguilar, O. B. Diaz, and J. E. Garcia, “Lightweight concretes of activated metakaolin-fly ash binders, with blast furnace slag aggregates,” Construction and building materials, vol. 24, no. 7, pp. 1166–1175, 2010.

[58] C. Shi, P. V. Krivenko, and D. M. Roy, Alkali-activated cements and concretes. Spon Press, 2006.

[59] K. A. Gruber, T. Ramlochan, A. Boddy, R. D. Hooton, and M. D. A. Thomas, “Increasing concrete durability with high-reactivity metakaolin,” Cement and concrete composites, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 479–484, 2001.

[60] F. M. Lea and C. H. Desch, The chemistry of cement and concrete, 3rd ed., vol. 727. London: Edward Arnold London, 1970.

[61] A. M. Dunster, J. R. Parsonage, and M. J. K. Thomas, “The Pozzolanic Reaction of Metakaolinite and Its Effects on Portland-Cement Hydration,” Journal of Materials Science, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 1345–1350, 1993.

[62] M. Murat, “Hydration reaction and hardening of calcined clays and related minerals. I. Preliminary investigation on metakaolinite,” Cement and Concrete Research, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 259–266, 1983.

[63] J. A. Kostuch, V. Walters, and T. R. Jones, “High performance concretes incorporating metakaolin: a review,” concrete, vol. 2, no. 1993, pp. 1799–811, 2000.

[64] M. Frias and J. Cabrera, “Pore size distribution and degree of hydration of metakaolin-cement pastes,” Cement and Concrete Research, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 561–569, 2000.

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

134

[65] M. Frías, M. I. de Rojas, and J. Cabrera, “The effect that the pozzolanic reaction of metakaolin has on the heat evolution in metakaolin-cement mortars,” Cement and concrete research, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 209–216, 2000.

[66] M. Oriol and J. Pera, “Pozzolanic activity of metakaolin under microwave treatment,” Cement and Concrete Research, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 265–270, 1995.

[67] M. A. Caldarone, K. A. Gruber, and R. G. Burg, “High reactivity metakaolin (HRM): a new generation mineral admixture for high performance concrete,” Concrete International, vol. 16, no. 11, pp. 37–

40, 1994.

[68] S. Wild, J. M. Khatib, and A. Jones, “Relative strength, pozzolanic activity and cement hydration in superplasticised metakaolin concrete,” Cement and Concrete Research, vol. 26, no. 10, pp. 1537–1544, 1996.

[69] B. B. Sabir, “The effects of curing temperature and water/binder ratio on the strength of metakaolin concrete’,” in Sixth CANMET/ACI International Conference on Fly Ash, Silica Fume, Slag and Natural Pozzolans in Concrete, Supplementary volume. Bangkok, Thailand, 1998, pp. 495–506.

[70] S. Rols, M. Mbessa, J. Ambroise, and J. Pera, “Influnce of Ultra-Fine Particle Type on Properties of Very-High Strength Concrete,” in In proceedings of the seond CANMET/ACI International Conference on High Performance Concrete and Performance and Quality of Concrete Structure,Gramado,RS., Brazil, 1999, pp. 671–686.

[71] J. Bai, S. Wild, B. B. Sabir, and J. M. Kinuthia, “Workability of concrete incorporating pulverized fuel ash and metakaolin,” Magazine of Concrete Research, vol. 51, no. 3, 1999.

[72] J. S. Lota, K. Kendall, and J. Bensted, “Mechanism for the modification of Portland cement hydration using polyacrylic acid,” Advances in cement research, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 45–56, 2000.

[73] S. Wild and J. M. Khatib, “Portlandite consumption in metakaolin cement pastes and mortars,” Cement and concrete research, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 137–146, 1997.

[74] F. Curcio, B. A. DeAngelis, and S. Pagliolico, “Metakaolin as a pozzolanic microfiller for high-performance mortars,” Cement and Concrete Research, vol. 28, no. 6, pp. 803–809, 1998.

[75] J. J. Brooks, M. A. Johari, and M. Mazloom, “Effect of admixtures on the setting times of high-strength concrete,” Cement and concrete Composites, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 293–301, 2000.

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

135

[76] ASTM C618., Standard Specification for Coal Fly Ash and Raw or Calcined Natural Pozzolan for Use in Concrete. Annual Book of ASTM Standards.

[77] ASTM 1602, Standard Specification for Mixing Water Used in the Production of Hydraulic Cement Concrete. Annual Book of ASTM Standards.

[78] ASTM C136., Standard Test Method for Sieve Analysis of Fine and Coarse Aggregates. Annual Book of ASTM Standards.

[79] ASTM C127, Standard Test Method for Density, Relative Density (Specific Gravity), and Absorption of Coarse Aggregate. Annual Book of ASTM Standards.

[80] ASTM C128, Test Method for Specific Gravity and Adsorption of Fine Aggregate. Annual Book of ASTM Standards.

[81] ASTM C29/C29M, Standard Test Method for Bulk Density (“Unit Weight”) and Voids in Aggregate. Annual Book of ASTM Standards.

[82] ASTM C566, Standard Test Method for Total Moisture Content of Aggregate by Drying,. Annual Book of ASTM Standards.

[83] ACI 211.2, Standard Practice for Selecting Proportions for Structural Lightweight Concrete. US: American Concrete Institute, 1998.

[84] BS EN 12390-2, Testing hardened concrete. Making and curing specimens for strength tests. London: British Standards Institution, 2000.

[85] ASTM C143, Standard test method for slump of hydraulic-cement concrete. Annual Book of ASTM Standards.

[86] IS 1199-1959, Indian Standard Methods of Sampling and Analysis of Concrete. New Delhi, India: Bureau of Indian Standards,.

[87] BS EN 12390-3, Testing hardened concrete-Part-3: Compressive strength of test specimens. London: British Standards Institution, 2002.

[88] ASTM C469, Standard Test Method for Static Modulus of Elasticity and Poisson’s Ratio of Concrete in Compression. Annual Book of ASTM Standards.

[89] ASTM C78, Standard Test Method for Flexural Strength of Concrete (Using Simple Beam with Third-Point Loading). Annual Book of ASTM Standards.

[90] ASTM C496, Standard Test Method for Splitting Tensile Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens. Annual Book of ASTM Standards.

© COPYRIG

HT UPM

136

[91] ASTM C234, Standard test method for comparing concretes on the basis of the bond developed with reinforcing steel. Annual Book of ASTM Standards.

[92] ASTM C33, Standard Specification for Concrete Aggregate. Annual Book of ASTM Standards.

[93] Y. A. Abdel-Jawad and W. S. Abdullah, “Design of maximum density aggregate grading,” Construction and Building Materials, vol. 16, no. 8, pp. 495–508, 2002.

[94] K. H. Khayat, “Workability, testing, and performance of self-consolidating concrete,” ACI Materials Journal, vol. 96, pp. 346–353, 1999.

[95] P. A. Gutierrez and M. F. Canovas, “High-performance concrete: requirements for constituent materials and mix proportioning,” ACI Materials Journal, vol. 93, no. 3, pp. 233–241, 1996.

[96] U. J. Alengaram, H. Mahmud, M. Z. Jumaat, and S. Shirazi, “Effect of aggregate size and proportion on strength properties of palm kernel shell concrete,” Int J Phys Sci, vol. 5, no. 12, pp. 1848–1856, 2010.

[97] S. Y. Thian and C. Y. Lee, “Stress history effect on mining sand with fines contents,” International Journal of Geomatics and Geosciences, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 1–10, 2010.

[98] Z. Li and Z. Ding, “Property improvement of Portland cement by incorporating with metakaolin and slag,” Cement and concrete research, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 579–584, 2003.

[99] ASTM C567, Standard test method for unit weight of structural lightweight concrete. Annual Book of ASTM Standards.

[100] D. C. L. Teo, M. A. Mannan, and J. V. Kurian, “Flexural behaviour of reinforced lightweight concrete beams made with oil palm shell (OPS),” Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 459–468, 2006.

[101] BS 8110-3, Structural use of concrete. Design charts for singly reinforced beams, boubly reinforced beams and rectangular columns. London: British Standards Institution.